Take Time to learn about blogs
Published June 27, 2004
David Anderson of In Search of Utopia brought my attention to an article about blogging in the current issue of Time. Balanced and long, the piece reminds us when blogs began to matter.
Most of America couldn't have cared less. Until December 2002, that is, when bloggers staged a dramatic show of force. The occasion was Strom Thurmond's 100th birthday party, during which Trent Lott made what sounded like a nostalgic reference to Thurmond's past segregationist leanings. The mainstream press largely glossed over the incident, but when regular journalists bury the lead, bloggers dig it right back up. "That story got ignored for three, four, five days by big papers and the TV networks while blogs kept it alive," says Joshua Micah Marshall, creator of talkingpointsmemo.com, one of a handful of blogs that stuck with the Lott story.
Mainstream America wasn't listening, but Washington insiders and media honchos read blogs. Three days after the party, the story was on Meet the Press. Four days afterward, Lott made an official apology. After two weeks, Lott was out as Senate majority leader, and blogs had drawn their first blood. Web journalists like Matt Drudge (drudgereport.com) had already demonstrated a certain crude effectiveness — witness l'affaire Lewinsky — but this was something different: bloggers were offering reasoned, forceful arguments that carried weight with the powers that be.
The full five-page article is worth reading.
Blogger Chris Kent recently criticized my entry about the New Weblog Showcase begun by Simon of Simon's World. In "New blogs should be better blogs," I said people joining the blogosphere should aspire to higher standards than those that prevail currently. I encouraged them not to violate copyright law and to actually read material they are excerpting or linking to so they know what it says, among other suggestions. Kent's remarks have the traits of a four-year-old throwing a tantrum because someone says his new tricycle is tacky.
To demean and insult with a rare (if not creepy) combination of talent and hate and then to rationalize it all into a neat little package of "Fighting for the high standards of Blogging!" is just a huge load of steaming bullshit.
I stand by my remarks. The tricycle known as the blogosphere is tacky.
Like many people new to the blogosphere, Kent believes it started about the time he arrived and has no sense of its history, scope or characteristics. In the interest of doing what I can to curtail such ignorance, I've decided to bring coverage of and information about the blogosphere to readers whenever possible. But, we already follow the topic, savvy bloggers and blog readers will say. I know you do. However, I believe there is a sizeable proportion of Chris Kents in the blogosphere — people who lack the curiosity to learn about the medium on their own.
A good place to start one's inquiry into the blogosphere is mainstream media. Therefore, I encourage bloggers and blog readers to read Time's imperfect, but relatively broad, recent article about blogs.
What's the art?
A diagram of the theoretical path of a blog entry through the blogosphere.
Note: This entry contains some material from a column at Mac-a-ro-nies.
- Take Time to learn about blogs
- Published: June 27, 2004
- Type:
- Section: Culture
- Writer: Mac Diva
- Mac Diva's BC Writer page
- Mac Diva's personal site
- Spread the Word
- Like this article?
- Email this
Save to del.icio.us
Comments on this articleComments
I care. Reading someone else's work is a contract. If I am going to read it, I'm giving my time. In return for that, I want to know that what I am reading is at least accurate, if it involves questions of fact.
Nor do I buy the claim that asking people to read an article before citing it is 'elitist.' I believe it is just common sense. If anything, it is arrogant to post material you haven't read and impose an inaccurate meaning on it.
Yes, some bloggers have no standards. I prefer the ones who do. If someone wants to write an entry extolling the wonderfulness of stealing material, posting stuff one hasn't read, poor spelling and grammar, etc., I welcome that. (I like funny stuff.) But, I also maintain the right to express my own opinion.
First:
"In "New blogs should be better blogs," I said people joining the blogosphere should aspire to higher standards than those that prevail currently."
Then:
"Note: Some of this entry from a column Mac-a-ro-nies."
[chuckle]
Yes. A typo that Movable Type missed. (It has been doing that a lot lately.) But, that typo occurs in an actual blog entry. A blog entry based on reading other blogs, analysis and research. Not the hijacking of material from Big Media and attaching his name to it that is RJ Elliott's sole 'contribution' to blogging. For once, I am glad to have him on one of my threads. No one better demonstrates what bloggers with any integrity or sense of standards would not be caught dead doing.
Yes. A typo that Movable Type missed. (It has been doing that a lot lately.)
priceless
Lil' Joe does very little blogging. He might throw up an unaccredited news item here or there. Or post a very attenuated 'opinion piece.' Usually a line or paragraph. I, on the other hand, do enough blogging to know when a service or server is acting up. When I posted this weekend, Blogcritics was slow and failed to do some updates. Even more annoying, sometimes a fix would work only to have something else come undone. Since this entry is addressed to newer bloggers, I will take the opportunity to let them know to expect some setbacks of this sort. My response is to wait out the problem. The situation may be better a few hours or the next day.
MD, what should MT have caught about your typo? MT does no grammar-checking and never has, so I'm not sure what has changed lately.
I corrected any errors I saw in my entries. That includes a new sig line that differed a little from the ones I normally use in this entry. Despite several attempts, the edits did not take. So, I did the fixes again today.
I am not saying the edit function is supposed to check spelling. However, it failed at what it is supposed to do -- incorporate updates.
I call you Lil' Joe because you are very, very, very small. Michael Landon was cute as Lil' Joe. You, unfortunately are not cute, but small.
Oh, I see, one of your many unsuccessful attempts at wit. Well, keep trying.
I figure any comment that references Bonanza is in desperate need of references and inspiration.....
Queen of Blogcritics uses "entries" as personal vendettas:
~now THERE'S some "professional" blogging.
I was extremely fond of reruns of Bonanza as a little girl. My sisters and I would take our baths, put on our little footed pajamas and sit in front of television mesmerized by the 'horsies' and Lil' Joe. Sometimes, Mama would let us ea tchocolate pudding while we watched. I liked Bonanza, so it must be wonderful television. (Remind you of a position resently taken, Chris Kent?)
I am flattered you would drop my name in one of your posts, as it proves that the comment I wrote - as honestly as I possibly could - must have struck a nerve.
As for positions taken, at least I did so truthfully......
Chris Kent, your position struck:
1. My funny bone, and
2. What my ex calls my Alice Walker-like tendency to be didactic.
I am completely sincere about better blogging and Bonanza.
(RJ Elliott, this one's for you)
DECONSTRUCTING OUR GURU
Data on this "professional", pedantic, personal vendetta "blog":
500 = total word count
269 = # words from MD's "original" insights
231 = total # words from articles quoted + Chris Kent's
The Professor's contributions to this "blog": a hair over 50%
Click here for a still-relevant
parody
As I am sincere about a "creepy combination of talent and hate"......
BTW: If you subtract (from The Guru's entry) the personal shots at Chris Kent, her contribution is...
yep, a pathethic ZERO percent of total word count.
~ahahahah
And, I am sincere about you being a know-nothing newbie, Chris Kent.
At least you are sincere about something.....I'm sorry it is hate and inferiority issues....
I am glad this "know-nothing newbie" could be a part of the sad blogging world of MacDiva.....
Add your comment, speak your mind
(Or ping: http://blogcritics.org/mt/tb/16873)
Who cares? People should blog whatever the hell they want to and what makes them happy. There is enough "elitist bullshit" in the real world that honestly it isn't needed here.
If you find a blog you don't like: DON'T READ IT.
Very simple.
Anyone who takes blogging seriously has too much time on their hands. When the internet really reaches everywhere and you can get feed at any time, all the time, (READ WARREN ELLIS'TRANSMETROPOLITAN!!!!) then maybe it will be a bit more important.
By acting like a snob about the "quality" of people's blogs, you are basically forgetting what having a blog is all about. Its self publishing at its finest. It is way to get yourself heard in public. If it sucks, then it sucks. If it is good then it is good. Cream rises to the top and all that jazz.
I'd bet that I have had a website and have been blogging much longer than the majority of posters on this site. Give me a break with the "blogging elitism" you only make us older bloggers (who often times are YOUNGER than these self purported "excellent bloggers") laugh. Whippersnappers in the the blogging world, the vast majority of you and you just don't get the internet really when it comes down to it.
If you want to blog, then BLOG. Write whatever you like, however you like. Fuck what other's people's opinions are.